MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2129431942 · doi:10.1109/glocom.2008.ecp.605

Distributed Detection of Primary Signals in Fading Channels for Cognitive Radio Networks

2008· article· en· W2129431942 on OpenAlexaff
Praveen Kaligineedi, Vijay K. Bhargava

Bibliographic record

Venuenot available
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldComputer Science
TopicDistributed Sensor Networks and Detection Algorithms
Canadian institutionsUniversity of British Columbia
Fundersnot available
KeywordsCognitive radioFadingQuantization (signal processing)Computer scienceBinary numberIndependent and identically distributed random variablesDetectorSensor fusionFusion centerElectronic engineeringAlgorithmDecoding methodsTelecommunicationsArtificial intelligenceMathematicsEngineeringWirelessStatisticsRandom variable

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

In this paper, we investigate cooperative sensing schemes to identify primary signals in fading environment for cognitive radio (CR) networks employing energy detectors. We consider a parallel fusion architecture in which all the sensing devices send their quantized sensing information to an access point, which then applies a fusion rule to determine the presence of the primary signal. We assume independent and identically distributed fading at various CR sensing devices. Considering identical binary quantization at the sensing devices, we study the optimal quantization and data fusion scheme. We compare the performance of the optimal binary data fusion scheme based on identical quantizers with the performances of other binary data fusion schemes commonly used in the literature for CR cooperative sensing networks. We further investigate the performance gain that could be obtained by using identical multi- bit quantization at the sensing devices.

Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.

How this classification was reachedexpand

Full frame machine prediction

Teacher imitation

Not calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.002
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.010
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Simulation or modeling · Consensus signal: Simulation or modeling
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.002
Threshold uncertainty score0.012

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0020.010
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.001
Scholarly communication0.0010.001
Open science0.0010.001
Research integrity0.0010.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0010.000

Machine scores (provisional)

The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.

Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.

Opus teacher head0.023
GPT teacher head0.230
Teacher spread0.207 · how far apart the two teachers sit on this one work
Validation statusscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it

Classification

machine, unvalidated

Machine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designSimulation or modeling
Domainnot available
GenreEmpirical

How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".

Quick stats

Citations23
Published2008
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same topicDistributed Sensor Networks and Detection AlgorithmsFrench-language works237,207